this really broke my bubble with the M14 even MORE!

[nf1e]

During my summer camp experience in RVN in the late 60's one mag stayed in my M-14 most of the time. The 4 mags on my pistol belt never had a chance to see light other than cleaning and reloading. The mag in my rifle was topped off many times from a bandoleer with stripper clips.

Semper Fi
Art

[PhillipM]

During my summer camp experience in RVN in the late 60's one mag stayed in my M-14 most of the time. The 4 mags on my pistol belt never had a chance to see light other than cleaning and reloading. The mag in my rifle was topped off many times from a bandoleer with stripper clips.

Semper Fi
Art

Were you taught to do that or was it a personal choice? Are you saying the four mags on your belt were not used unless it was an emergency?

[nf1e]

Were you taught to do that or was it a personal choice? Are you saying the four mags on your belt were not used unless it was an emergency?

Suggested by those that had gone before me. In the Marine Corps, you learn to listen to the gents that have experience. Keep your belt mags in reserve. Aimed fire is quite effective on a man sized target. Ammo generally stays nice and clean in a bandoleer. Sand and other junk tends to infiltrate the mag pouches, at least in my experience.

[Griff Murphey]

Suggested by those that had gone before me. In the Marine Corps, you learn to listen to the gents that have experience. Keep your belt mags in reserve. Aimed fire is quite effective on a man sized target. Ammo generally stays nice and clean in a bandoleer. Sand and other junk tends to infiltrate the mag pouches, at least in my experience.

I'm wondering if you had the USMC single mag pouches or the Army type double mag pouches. The marine corps pouches had a top flap only, open at the sides, whereas the army type had a box-like top.

But....The army ones had the disadvantage of being like a pair of bricks when you went prone.

[nf1e]

We had the single pouches. As the years go by, I have developed that brick over my belt when I go prone. Nothing that the loss of 50lb wouldn't cure.

[smle-man]

Dern Ted, I was just going to opine that this scenario would never arise in the real world.. and a well trained armorer/rifle smith had it happen to him here in the USA...............


In Dad's outfit in the Aleutians, during the fighting there, some men's Garands froze up ... they learned to completely degrease the rifles & to run them dry & had no more problems... When they were in Europe in 1944... he made sure the men of his company ran their rifles dry... and to get boots 1/2 size or 1 size big so that they could wear multiple pairs of warm wool socks & still have room for their feet to expand......Lessons leaned from earlier similar situations... prevents the same problems from arising.

I'm glad Ted told of us of his fix for that problem... I love that old M1A...........

SLA Marshall wrote about M1 rifles working sluggishly or not at all from the powdery dust in Korea during the war. Most likely over lubricated for the conditions.

[Col. Colt]

SLA Marshall is not a completely credible source. A lot of wrong conclusions came out of his work. We knew in WWII from the Kasarine Pass forward to cut back on lubrication if dust was present - it's in the manual. It explicitly mentions going to a light instrument lube - or none - in such conditons. The Aleutians campaign was another such "learning experience" in "cold weather operations" - US forces learned a lot the hard way in the first two years of fighting a global war. New weapons, new tactics - a steep learning curve we did master, but not without cost.

Learning "what works" from those who went before you simply makes sense. It amazes me the number of people who buy an M1A (which SAI sends with a copy of the GI M14 Manual) who apparently are unaware of what is already known - different environments you operate in do matter, but can be easily dealt with if you know what you should know about your rifle. If you haven't studied your personal weapon in any depth, shame on you.

What I really object to about SLA Marshall are his conclusions from his sometimes disputable observations - that lead us away from rifle skill and into full auto and the M16 as a substitute. For example, he promoted the idea that we don't need a rifle that can shoot past 300 yards because most guys don't fire their rifles using aimed fire at any but quite short ranges. That's a training problem, not a call for a shorter ranged gun. And he also said most troops don't fire at all. These are Training and morale issues - not hardware issues. My Dad (82nd Airborne, WWII Sgt.) told me WWII Airborne personnel were routinely expected to be able to hit a man out to 500 yards with their M1s - pretty much on demand, the majority of the time. They knew all about windage and elevation and range estimation. If someone taught you the proper care and feeding of a Garand actioned firearm already known in WWII (reduce/change lubes as current environmental conditons dictate) in Boot camp you would not have the reported problems after that date, would you? CC

[Rock]

Although this is an M1 test, may as well post it here for anyone who hasn't seen it. The lesson learned is that firearms don't function when filled with dirt rocks or mud. Seal or protect the action and they will work on and off until the dirt eventually filters in.